|
|
|
Comment |
Sorted by
Date Written |
Re: Re: Insuladd's Slight of Hand Advertisements (Reply to this comment)
by the_gas_man
Thanks for taking time to leave your comment. Very true, and yet, they brand people who dare to express doubts about their grand claims for "potential" energy savings, as being "uneducated". Go figure.
Regards,
The Gasman
|
Oct 20 '09
8:28 am PDT
|
|
Re: Insuladd's Slight of Hand Advertisements (Reply to this comment)
by fitzharrys
I've just spent some time looking at thermilate's website. If it wasn't sad it would be funny. Anybody who was half listening in physics class at school would not buy a product sold in this way. I think this whole conversation illustrates the importance of decent education.
|
Oct 16 '09
10:00 am PDT
|
|
Insuladd's Slight of Hand Advertisements (Reply to this comment)
by the_gas_man
To David Page, the CEO of Tech Traders,
Did you not make this statement several years ago?
Insuladd products have been extremely well tested and have earned the EnergyStar mark.
Now,... please furbish this forum with proof that Insuladd paint additives (which is what this entire review was about) has "earned the Energy Star mark".
However, you can't, because it was never given to this product. Therefore you are using your partnership arrangement with Energy Star to promote an inferior product that your company promotes and using your Energy Star partnership logo on your website to imply U.S. government approval.
While the above statement does not directly state that your paint additives are Energy Star approved, please try to explain why you bring Energy Star into the discussion about the effectiveness of the paint additives your company promotes?
Slight of hand can take many forms in advertising.
Once again, I will remind you that Energy Star/the U.S. EPA has asked you to refrain from implying that this paint additive is in any way approved or endorsed by them.
Regards,
The Gasman
|
Oct 14 '09
8:31 am PDT
|
|
Re: Re: Re: Slanderous, uneducated statement (Reply to this comment)
by the_gas_man
Hi Konan,
Sorry for the delay in responding to you, I didn't receive any notification by email.
I'm not sure but I think you may have been confused by the two products Insuladd sells. The one that I have written about here is a paint additive comprised of ceramic particles. That is the product I have referred to as misleading. It is not approved by Energy Star.
I understand that Insuladd also sells a roofing product with an elastomer base, and Energy Star has tested and listed that product.
Your confusion over the two products and test results that have been generated, is partially due to the way these products are presented on Insuladd's website. Insuladd is an Energy Star partner, the paint additive is just not included, has not been tested by EPA and they have asked Insuladd to stop implying that it is listed by Energy Star, which is misleading advertising.
As far as their roof coatings are concerned, I have no information about them and no reason to believe they are not an effective roof coating.
Regards,
The Gasman
|
Jul 25 '09
5:03 pm PDT
|
|
Re: Gasman has personal crusade ? Actually, I Have a Few... (Reply to this comment)
by the_gas_man
Hi David, and thank you for your most biased views of the facts. It should be extremely clear, to anyone, that I do not work for your competitors, as I would not promote a product that has limited, if any, benefits to consumers. Where in my article or on this site, have I attempted to sell a product or service to consumers? I could understand your inept charges against me if somewhere I was pointing the reader towards another source of product. I have made it clear that I do not sell products or services and in fact, I donate hundreds of hours of my time each year, responding to questions from consumers, free of charge.
A crusade (?) defined as, a remedial enterprise undertaken with zeal and enthusiasm. I suppose that is accurate. Your company advertised up to 40% in energy savings on your heating and cooling costs and with zeal and enthusiasm, I embarked on a remedial enterprise, which I undertook to force you to admit the truth and to protect consumers from a blatantly false advertisements. I have since made you offers to prove your case and you have rejected them, tending instead to mount personal attacks against me. It won't wash David.
While you, and a few of your associates have signed onto Epinions for the sole purpose of trying to stop me from exposing the exaggerated claims in your advertisements and the very limited benefits of Insuladd or Thermilate, applied to the walls of a typical home.
I do not "slander" any products, I present the truth, which is something Tech Traders, Insuladd and Thermilate conveniently ignore in pursuit of profits. Let's face facts, your company has taken a modicum of scientific truth and blown it out of proportion, like the snake oil salesmen of the last century.
I am surprised that NASA has allowed you to use their name without reprisals, it cheapens their reputation too. The gas fireplace industry has used NASA's name too, since they began using ceramic fiber logs. However, they didn't embellish the truth, ceramic fiber based products will withstand high temperatures and when cast into the shape of a log, they are much lighter than the concrete logs previously used.
The HVAC industry in general has taken advantage of the properties of ceramic fiber products, in paper gaskets and rope gaskets. These were considered advancements in the aftermath of asbestos being banned.
I do not ignore "unbiased" test data from any "accredited" testing facilities, I really enjoyed this one,
http://www.energyideas.org/documents/Factsheets/PTR/Insuladd.pdf
Have you taken the time to read it? Why not put a link to it on your website? It was an honest assessment of your product and it actually suggests that Insuladd may decrease the energy efficiency of a home in the winter. This article also discusses the limited benefits of your product and the deteriorating usefulness as a radiant heat deflector with aging. This article flat out questions any significant improvement in "R" values through the use of your product. (As I did from the beginning.)
I have asked you before, but now I really want an answer. How can you claim that your product, when painted onto the sides of a home, deflects the radiant heat of the sun and therefore lowers cooling costs and not acknowledge that in the winter, your product is going to reduce heat gain from the sun would force the heating system to work harder, thereby increasing energy costs. You can't have it both ways and cherry pick the physics side to suit your advertisments.
Energy Star is meaningless with regards to the paint additives. Slapping their logo on your product does not mean that Energy Star "endorses" your claims or your product. In actual fact, they have asked you to stop implying their endorsement of the paint additives.
Have you conducted any tests that were not paid for by your company or an affiliated company? Why would I waste my time calling Geoscience Ltd., when your company sponsored their test work? How would they be able to provide unbiased comments that bites the hand that feeds them.
There's nothing odd about the fact that I chose to respond to your advertisements in January of 2002 which "boldly" claimed up to 40% in energy savings on heating and cooling costs. If, as you repeatedly claim, I was slandering your product, why have your claims of up to 40% all but disappeared from your advertisments? If my comments from 2002 were so poorly researched and stuffed with mere technical opinion, why have your marketing people dropped their energy saving claims by 50% to "save up to 20% plus"?
Even in the article in NASA Spinoff. They make no claims about the efficiency of their products, they simply say, it can save you money. The article discusses the environmental benefits, if all homes in America could be 10% more efficient and at no time does it claim that this product could help consumers achieve 10% or better energy efficiency.
Therefore David, if a company does not make wild, unsubstantiated claims of up to 40% or even 20% plus, in promised energy savings, but simply says, "Our product is inexpensive and "could" save you money". What is there to dispute? Now it's simply a case of buyer beware.
The "well researched" article you refer to also says that the technical director of Hy-Tech, one Al Abruzzese, worked directly with NASA engineers as they developed their product (which sounds surprisingly similar to yours). It must really bother you that they wrote that article without mentioning Tech Traders or Insuladd. You shouldn't advertise this article to your potential customers as it leads them to your competition's front door and frankly, they seem to be more credible than yours. At least I was able to find the MSDS sheet for this type of product on "their site". I don't see your site warning people about Health Hazard Data and to use NIOSH certified dust respirators, chemical goggles and cotton gloves when handling your product. Why is that?
David, it's time for your company to tone down your wild energy savings claims. Post the appropriate health warnings to those handling it. Boost it as a relatively low cost enhancement to the exterior paint coating's life expectancy and water proofing and I won't comment on it.
All I have asked for was verifiable, unbiased, documented proof of the energy savings your company claims in their advertisements. Could it be that you refused to respond with such proof because you can't?
Regards,
The Gasman
|
Jul 24 '09
10:11 am PDT
|
|
Re: Re: A review from University of Illinois (Reply to this comment)
by the_gas_man
Hi Ktsubara,
Even the title of the link you provided says roofing in it. This link has absolutely nothing to do with their paint additives. Tech Traders have a roofing product that is in a completely different classification that is listed by EPA and entitles them to use the Energy Star logo as a partner on their website. They are abusing their partnership status with EPA and Energy Star by implying the paint additives are included in this listing, which it is not.
However, I have corresponded with EPA on this issue and in addition to their response to me personally, to the effect that they have asked Tech Traders not to imply their paint additives are listed too, the following disclaimer is on EPA's website (Energy Star)
EPA does not recommend paints and coatings be used in place of traditional bulk insulation. We haven’t seen any independent studies which can verify their insulating qualities. (My highlights.)
EPA qualifies paint only as a roof coating in our Roofs program (generally used for the top of a commercial building roof). Roof coatings are NOT insulation. They reflect solar heat off a roof rather than absorbing it keeping the building cooler. Learn more about the ENERGY STAR Roof program.
If a manufacturer uses their status as an ENERGY STAR Roofs Partner to imply that EPA or DOE recommend ceramic paint products and/or considers ceramic paint "insulation" then please report this to us at logomisuse@energystar.gov."
In no uncertain terms EPA has stated the paint additives are not approved and they have seen no unbiased reports to prove otherwise.
Until Tech Traders stop implying Energy Star approval for these paint additives and energy savings of up to 20% or as they did several years ago and their current Canadian distributor advertises "up to 40%", they continue to mislead the public.
I have not investigated the 3M product and this review has nothing to do with their products (yet).
Regards,
The Gasman
|
Jul 24 '09
9:47 am PDT
|
|
Re: Re: Re: I have tested Insuladd (Reply to this comment)
by the_gas_man
Why not address the comments made by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency? Or even attempt to discuss the poor results reported by Washington University?
I find it odd that for someone with no "dog" in this debate (not fight) is ready to sign up to Epinions just to leave a lame testimonial, which has absolutely nothing to do with the insulation value of Insuladd or Thermilate. By your own statement "I know this was not a scientific test," Coating the lid of a barbecue has nothing to do with the heat loss of a home, which is primarily through doors, windows, the chimney, vents, exhaust fans and roofing. Are you now proposing that people paint over their windows with this gunk? As adding a layer of paint to exterior and/or interior walls, in winter, laden with anything is virtually useless.
Does it reduce energy use in a house? I do not know. Since you made this statement, I suggest you reread my review, it is entirely about the grossly exaggerated savings that Insuladd made several years ago (Up To 40% Savings On Your Heating and Cooling Costs). That is what sparked this debate and what forced Insuladd to reduce their fuel saving estimates to 20%, and yet they still can't even prove that has ever been achieved!
I suspect only the owner or Insuladd or someone with a vested interest in it would take time to join Epinions to leave behind a selection of very weak counter points. Which once again fail to address any of my points.
Regards,
The Gasman
|
Jul 24 '09
9:43 am PDT
|
|
A Parting Thought About Insuladd, Hy-Tech and All Other Paint Additives (Reply to this comment)
by the_gas_man
I am someone with a life long career in the heating, ventilating and air conditioning (HVAC) industry and who was born long before the creation of NASA or the discovery of the benefits of ceramic tiles and ceramics in general, in certain high temperature applications. As such, I am always open to new technology that improves our lives, reduces energy dependence and saves us money with such things as higher efficiency heating and cooling systems, hybrid cars, new building technologies, solar systems, wind generators, ground source heat pumps, to name a few, which have all been created or improved upon in my lifetime.
As an open minded HVAC professional, what possible reason could I have for writing this review and calling their potential energy saving grossly exaggerated for such products as paint additives, if they actually did work? The short answer is, I wouldn't. If I believed the energy saving claims made by these companies were possible, I would be promoting the product.
However, it is because of my training in the HVAC industry that I know these products do not come close to meeting the claimed energy savings they imply and my opinion happens to be supported by the EPA's Energy Star of the U.S. government, RIMA International and Washington University.
I and the three agencies above have no profit motives in this debate.
Regards,
The Gasman
|
Jul 24 '09
9:36 am PDT
|
|
Insuladd - email with the company -> BE CAREFUL (Reply to this comment)
by jagry1999
Here is an email exchange I had with the company [their response did not address the guarantee question I asked]:
Mark,
If you look through our website you will see about 12 or so tests done by third parties on Insuladd.
We have great articles written about us by NASA as well as the media. if you want to listed to "the gasman" who wrote the Epinions article and who has no credentials, and has never see or used our products then that is your choice.
14 years of producing Insuladd and no complaintrs fromany customers via the Better Business Bureau should tyell you that the Epionions article is wrong. (we are suing for libel and defamation for that article by the way!)
Regards,
David Page
----- Original Message -----
From: jagry1999@aol.com
To: info@insuladd.com
Sent: Monday, July 20, 2009 1:40 PM
Subject: Product questions
I saw your product on "I want that!" and when I went to research your product, I found http://www99.epinions.com/content_2452594820 that says your product is a scam because there has been no independent product research (even sites the EPA).
Is this critical site correct?
If I do not get a 20% in utility usage, can I get a refund?
Thanx.
Mark
Las Vegas
|
Jul 20 '09
1:10 pm PDT
|
|
Re: A Parting Thought About Insuladd, Hy-Tech and All Other Paint Additives (Reply to this comment)
by truthgoogler
Thank you, Gas Man. This morning on Fine Living Network, FLN, here in the Palm Springs area, on their program "I Want That" they did a segment on InsulAdd, citing that it was developed with NASA technology, making the 20% savings claim again, describing the ceramic as "encapsulating" air, not strictly dust.
Glad I Googled the topic and found your refutation of the energy savings claim. I was about to purchase the product immediately, due to our brutal heat here in the desert. I get direct exposure on two sides of the stuccoed home and at 114 degrees the heat index on the exterior must be in the 125 degree range and we feel it inside.
Anecdotal claims or worse, the suspect, unsubstantiated claims you refer to are unconscionable without scientific proof from the authorized agencies/organizations/universities you cite. I hope you stay on this forum 'til solid proof is provided. (Doubt that will ever occur). Meanwhile, I wish you would try to get in contact with FLN so they don't blindly promote this logical-sounding but unproven technology.
|
Jul 12 '09
11:02 am PDT
|
|
Re: Re: I have tested Insuladd (Reply to this comment)
by futuresys1
I find it interesting that gasman accuses everyone who disagrees with him of working for one of the manufacturers of these products. I also realized that the product I tested (it was years ago) was Hytech, not Insuladd.
As far as working on the interior walls and ceiling of a concrete block structure; that makes sense because I know of a metal building where the same thing was done and they claim it helped tremendously also, although I have no proof, just their word. No, gasman, they did not work for one of these companies either.
I joined epinions to give the other side of an what I consider to be a very one-sided negative opinion of a material of which I have had personal. positve experience. Since gasman overtly implies I must have a stake in this in order to go to the trouble to join and post I thought I would respond.
Today is the first time since that post I have read the forum and am still trying to figure out the motive behind gasman's attacks on anyone who says anything positive about these products.
|
Apr 06 '09
2:18 pm PDT
|
|
Yet Another New Epinions Member With Only One Thought? (Reply to this comment)
by the_gas_man
Dear Hben37,
Thanks for taking the time to join Epinions and leave your testimonial. Insuladd must be handing out free bags of dust to everyone who works for them, who joins Epinions.
Once again, lots of so-called testimonial without hard data. Not one shred of evidence to contradict the Washington University report or the U.S. EPA.
This is great. My review is getting more and more people to join this community just to leave comments on my reviews. It must mean that my comments are getting through to the masses and someone is getting upset at me.
All you have to do, Insuladd, Thermilate or Hy-Tech is prove the savings you propose can be had in one concrete case, where the results have been obtained by an unbiased third party and recognized testing agency. Do that, and I will admit I'm wrong and pull this review.
I hear those crickets chirping again.
Regards,
The Gasman
|
Feb 14 '09
8:43 am PST
|
|
My informal test was very positive (Reply to this comment)
by hben37
I bought 2 samples each of the Insuladd and the Hy-tech products, and I must admit I do not have hard evidence that this stuff works other than my girlfriend's testimony: I painted 2 rooms in her house, the rooms are solid concrete walls, I did the interior and the ceiling. During these few weeks of winter, the rooms do not compare to their previous situation when you could see your breath vapor on those cold winter nights. Ever since I applied the paint, she has been able to sleep without all those covers on her bed. She swears by the results and can't wait until I have time to paint the rest of her house with the additive. As the previous poster said, I cannot understand Gasman's attitude, but I just wanted to pitch in my 2 cents while I stated my satisfaction with the product reviewed.
|
Feb 13 '09
10:41 pm PST
|
|
I have tested Insuladd (Reply to this comment)
by futuresys1
Several years ago I successfully tested this product. I bought a cheap, metal, portable gas grill with a top. I painted half of the top with a high temp paint and the ceramic bead product. I applied several coats and let it dry. I then lit the grill. After a very few seconds the unpainted half was too hot to touch without serious burns. I was still able to place my hand flat on the painted side for quite a while. I know this was not a scientific test but the ceramic definitely does work as an insulator. I witnessed and participated in a demo where steam pipes were coated with a competing brand of ceramic bead high temp coating. You could actually put your face against the painted sections while doing so on the unpainted would have led to serious burns and loss of skin.
Does it reduce energy use in a house? I do not know. It does, however, provide major benefits in high temp situations. Additionally, there is a major paint mfgr. in California that adds the ceramic beads to its paints to greatly extend the life of the paint job and make it much easier to clean. They make no insulating claims and I cannot remember their name.
I have no dog in this fight and only found this discussion today after following up on an article referring to a NASA award to Insuladd. I must say that I do not know any of the players but gasman's vehemence is hard to understand.
|
Jan 23 '09
8:57 am PST
|
|
Re: A review from University of Illinois (Reply to this comment)
by ktsubaru
Hi Gasman. Thank you for your comments. I apologize for a part of my previous comment did not make sense. I will look up my notebook I took during the class and comment here later on.
What I am really interested in is that are all the so-called insulation additives are invalid? 3M does disclose technical information on their website.
On the 63rd page of the following link, Insuladd is listed under Tech Traders and I believe this is an official Energystar website. So, I think insulation additive is a valid material to save energy.
http://www.energystar.gov/ia/products/prod_lists/roof_prods_prod_list.pdf
I would like to hear your opinion about the above link.
|
Jan 06 '09
10:44 pm PST
|
|
Re: A review from University of Illinois (Reply to this comment)
by the_gas_man
Hi Ktsubura,
Thanks for your views, however, the link you provided does not lead me to a technical review of the product by the University of Illinois. It looks to be a description of the Insuladd product that may very well have been taken directly from Tech Traders own website. There are no test results only a parroting of the properties claimed by the makers of Insuladd.
I would also like to know why Mr. David Page has never responded to the report by U of W or to the published statement by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency? Tech Traders/Insuladd steadfastly refuse to respond to the fact that EPA has asked them to stop implying their paint additives are approved in any way by them.
The rest of your comment made little sense, the people at Tech Traders promoting Insuladd are primarily targeting consumers to use it on their homes to save on energy costs. That is the primary issue here. If they acknowledged that their product is virtually useless in this application there would be no dispute. Instead they flaunt the Energy Star logo on their website and imply this paint additive is approved when it is not.
This entire paragraph is gibberish,
It is a very important factor for industrial use and I doubt some that the Insuladd truly understands the importance of thermal conductivity in the industries. I heard a chemistry professor talked about thermal conductivity of a molecular, so I believe it is an important factor. You heard a professor (talk)about thermal conductivity of a molecular (?) A molecular what??? An important factor is what application? You seem to enjoy using long sentences to convey nothing. Thisis the very kind of response I would expect from David Page.
I did like your suggestion for making sure you spread it on thickly to ensure it works. Insuladd already spreads it on thickly on their website.
If the University of Illinois ever does a real study and doesn't simple repeat portions of an existing commercial website, I would be interested in reading it.
Thanks for your comments. I take it you are a first year engineering student, so accept some advice, always keep an open mind, but do not blindly believe what a manufacturer says about their own products. I wish you luck in your chosen field.
Regards,
The Gasman
|
Jan 06 '09
5:04 am PST
|
|
A review from University of Illinois (Reply to this comment)
by ktsubaru
I am a new member with epinions.com, so I understand my comments will not be reliable as other members who have been with the site.
I learned of this product by a client in Japan who is interested in eco-friendly products. He said to me that similar product is available from 3M as Hollow Glass Bubbles and a few other brands exist in this category. 3M discloses particle sizes, Thermal conductivity, which Insuladd has denied as irrelevant. It is a very important factor for industrial use and I doubt some that the Insuladd truly understands the importance of thermal conductivity in the industries. I heard a chemistry professor talked about thermal conductivity of a molecular, so I believe it is an important factor.
It is very interesting to read an information from Washington State University. I am a Mechanical Engineering major at University of Texas at Arlington, TX. (I will provide my school E-mail address upon request to verify my status) and I understand that universities never give biased information. However, I thought it is interesting to see the following information from the University of Illinois.
http://www2.arch.uiuc.edu/elvin/insuladd.htm
I have spoken with Mr.David Page over the phone in the past and I assume that he is a little bit annoyed by consumers confusion with HY-TECH products.
Probably, those who don't get the good results from thermal insulation additives might need to apply the product with more thicker layer.
|
Jan 05 '09
7:18 pm PST
|
|
Re: My Tests found no benefit... (Reply to this comment)
by the_gas_man
Thanks for taking time to leave your comments. While I fully believe you, I doubt Tech Trader's will want to publish your comments alongside of their so-called, independent endorsements.
Your results sound about right for a bit of "magic dust" mixed in with house paint.
Regards,
The Gasman
|
Dec 21 '08
9:03 am PST
|
|
My Tests found no benefit... (Reply to this comment)
by dadmanoaktown
I wish i had seen this Epinion before I ordered a sample to test. I guess I wish that, but maybe not since I enjoyed testing the claims with my kid. We took four concrete paving blocks to simulate the stucco of our house. Primed them all with Bin 123 primer. Then took measured amounts of our existing house paint (wall color and the trim color) and mixed in the magic powder. It was a lot of powder for the given volume of paint. It became all smooth and glopy. Kind of fun to stir and to spread. It sort of blurs the texture of the underlying stuff. We also, as a control, painted two other pavers with unimproved paint. After they dried we put them out in the sun. The were either the same temperature (IR thermometer 12 inches from the surfaces, same angle, same distance, side by side pavers) or the magic powder ones were hotter. Hotter I thought maybe that was reflection of more heat, yay. nope. the backsides were also hotter so the energy was getting into the paver. Other days the temps were the same. Darker colors got hotter regardless of the additive. A big bust.
|
Dec 17 '08
11:59 pm PST
|
|
One more chance for Tech Traders to come clean... (Reply to this comment)
by the_gas_man
David,
I have reprinted your comment from January of this year, so that you can't delete it to cover your tracks. This statement appears to be stating quite openly that this paint additive has "Energy Star qualifications"?
As you know, EPA have asked you to stop implying this product is endorsed by Energy Star. Will you now take the Energy Star logo off of your website and stop implying it is endorsed by them?
Gasman has personal crusade ? (Reply to this comment)
by techtraders
I am not sure why the "Gasman" has made it his apparently personal crusade to slander Insuladd products.
Starting in January of 2002 he has written poorly researched and highly opinionated comments on Insuladd products stating his opinion that they are a scam and how they cannot possibly work.
I do not know if gasman works for our competitors but it surely appears that that is the case.
Ignoring test data from accredited testing facilities, Energy Star qualifications, and just recently the 2008 NASA Spin Off Magazines well researched article, the gasman continues to preach his disbelief that Insuladd can and does work.
He could actually pick up his telephone and call Geoscience Ltd. the facility that has done substantial testing on Insuladd products and ask how and if the products actually work but I guess it is easier for him to make bold statements about Insuladd without actually doing any research
It is also very odd that he makes no negative comments about companies like Hy-Tech Distributors ( see www.hytechsales.com) who claim to have products like Insuladd and yet show absolutely no test data or means to qualify their product claims.
Gasman its time for you to pick up the phone and actually do some research on Insuladd instead of slandering the product.
David Page
Tech Tech Traders Inc.
"The Insuladd Company"
888-748-5233 Jan 23 '08
12:30 pm PST
|
Oct 23 '08
2:10 pm PDT
|
|
Tech Trader...Respond to Independent Report by Washington State University. (Reply to this comment)
by the_gas_man
David,
As CEO of Insuladd, I am repeating this request here, as I have by email to you directly. Your silence in response to this report and the information posted by RIMA- International is almost deafening, but understandable.
Regards,
The Gasman
David,
Before you write another word about how I'm attacking your company because, you claim I'm being paid by your competition, why don't you respond to the overwhelming, independent comments made by Washington State University?
The Gasman
http://www.energyideas.org/documents/Factsheets/PTR/Insuladd.pdf
|
Oct 23 '08
11:36 am PDT
|
|
Re: Does it reflect heat? (Reply to this comment)
by the_gas_man
Boltron,
In follow up to your question last May, RIMA International RIMA-I represents reflective insulation, radiant barrier and interior radiation control coating (IRCC) manufacturers and other companies that are active within the industry. RIMA-I exists to educate the marketplace on the benefits of reflective technologies and to represent member's interests in establishing ASTM standards for testing and installation procedures.
Under their national test standards this paint additive product and their competitor, Hy-Tech Sales, failed to meet the minimum ASTM requirements to be classified as an IRCC. In fact, these products did not even come close to meeting the minimum threshold required for classification. Something that Insuladd's David Page still refuses to comment on.
Regards,
The Gasman
|
Oct 23 '08
11:30 am PDT
|
|
Re: Re: Slanderous, uneducated statement (Reply to this comment)
by mylar
I Just keep looking for the proof ,that shows it WORKS! Im still looking.{ not Really} you guys keep saying it works, but where is Your proof? I know talk is cheap, But Your Insuladd talk, has wasted enough of my time. I have seen enough information,that has shown your product, to be little more than "WORTHLESS". Just another AMERICAN, Sick Of The UNFOUNDED CLAIMS & RIPOFFS.INSULADD "You do have my promise", I will Buy Insulcrap, The same day i buy Gasmans MAGICBEANS. I might even make you a cup, with your non toxic ceramic, i hear it taste like honey.
|
Aug 15 '08
4:17 pm PDT
|
|
Re: Re: Slanderous, uneducated statement (Reply to this comment)
by mylar
Dear Mr. gasman Thank You. I was thinking about using the additive,& was looking for proof that it works. With all the bantering back & forth, its amazing how much info you can go thru{ & all im thinking is " JUST PROVE IT" }. I now believe its not worth it. Sir , i live in the southwest, & have been thinking of Stapling mylar to the ceiling joists in the attic, of a home built in 1978. Do you think this will help? ive added 2 attic vents & our bedroom is still hot & the bills just keep climbing.Could you direct me, to a site, Where i can learn a little about, adequate attic venting etc... Thank you. P.S The whirly bird type vents, on the flat roof of the garage, are worthless. we have 2, they spin, yet the garage is hotter than outside.
|
Aug 15 '08
4:07 pm PDT
|
|
Re: Re: Slanderous, uneducated statement (Reply to this comment)
by konanthegreat
I live at a moderately hot country. My house has a flat roof with bitumen sheet water proof roof coating. It does not insulate the house from the heat. Searching for a solution that will be cost effective and efficient, I stumbled upon Insuladd. Reading your comments and their replies cooled my enthusiasm considerably. why wouldn't an elastomer based coating enriched with heat deflecting material such as the Insuladd additive work as insulator of heat generated by the sun and pounding on the roof and south walls? what about the test results in china, with close to zero degree c outside that is quoted on their site. and the fact that NASA uses that stuff on the insulating breaks on its space shuttles for heat deflection on reentry? I would appreciate answeres from you if you have them? as for magic products that don't sell, check out polyurea and liquid rubber?
best regards
konanthegreat
|
Aug 04 '08
5:04 pm PDT
|
|
Re: Slanderous, uneducated statement (Reply to this comment)
by the_gas_man
Dear David Page, CEO of Insuladd, and supplier to Thermilate in the UK,
Too often, over the past several years, you have taken shelter behind the Energy Star logo as independent proof that your garbage, ceramic paint additives had proven energy saving properties.
The following Questions and Answers are taken directly from the ENERGY STAR website at:
http://energystar.custhelp.com/cgi-bin/energystar.cfg/php/enduser/std_adp.php?
Question
Does ceramic paint work as insulation? Can these paints be ENERGY STAR qualified?
Answer
EPA does not recommend paints and coatings be used in place of traditional bulk insulation. We haven’t seen any independent studies which can verify their insulating qualities.
EPA qualifies paint only as a roof coating in our Roofs program (generally used for the top of a commercial building roof). Roof coatings are NOT insulation. They reflect solar heat off a roof rather than absorbing it keeping the building cooler. Learn more about the ENERGY STAR Roof program.
If a manufacturer uses their status as an ENERGY STAR Roofs Partner to imply that EPA or DOE recommend ceramic paint products and/or considers ceramic paint "insulation" then please report this to us at logomisuse@energystar.gov."
Consider you, your company's and your website's abuse of the Energy Star logo reported, for comments like this one: made on May 16, 2007
Slanderous, uneducated statement
(Reply to this comment)
by techtraders
A slanderous and uneducated opinion is all that this article is about.
The author is guilty of totally ingoring multiple sources of verifiable testing and not taking the time to temper is statements with a little research.
Insuladd products have been extremely well tested and have earned the EnergyStar mark.
The Gas Man needs to re-evaluate his statements and do a little research before he speaks!
Ignorance can be a dangerous thing!
and this one on January 23, 2008,
Gasman has personal crusade ?
(Reply to this comment)
by techtraders
I am not sure why the "Gasman" has made it his apparently personal crusade to slander Insuladd products.
Starting in January of 2002 he has written poorly researched and highly opinionated comments on Insuladd products stating his opinion that they are a scam and how they cannot possibly work.
I do not know if gasman works for our competitors but it surely appears that that is the case.
Ignoring test data from accredited testing facilities, Energy Star qualifications, and just recently the 2008 NASA Spin Off Magazines well researched article, the gasman continues to preach his disbelief that Insuladd can and does work.
He could actually pick up his telephone and call Geoscience Ltd. the facility that has done substantial testing on Insuladd products and ask how and if the products actually work but I guess it is easier for him to make bold statements about Insuladd without actually doing any research
It is also very odd that he makes no negative comments about companies like Hy-Tech Distributors ( see www.hytechsales.com) who claim to have products like Insuladd and yet show absolutely no test data or means to qualify their product claims.
Gasman its time for you to pick up the phone and actually do some research on Insuladd instead of slandering the product.
David Page
Tech Tech Traders Inc.
"The Insuladd Company"
888-748-5233
Your websites also filled with references to Energy Star approvals that have nothing to do with your paint additives. You have been very good at skirting direct statements like Energy Star has approved this product, but as you can see they are interested in companies who "imply" approval and abuse the use of their respected logo.
|
Jul 25 '08
9:20 am PDT
|
|
Thank you Gasman (Reply to this comment)
by longbill
I have followed your comments with interest.
I think the Washington State University report says all that needs to be said about this "product" :"On interior walls, the benefit was found to be
negligible with conventional heating systems."
If anyone is in any doubt about what this means, I suggest that they look up "negligible" in the dictionary.
|
Jul 25 '08
12:30 am PDT
|
|
Re: Re: tvyankeefan (Reply to this comment)
by the_gas_man
I think the lack of response by this person with their positive results after a year of performance speaks for itself. You will wait a long time for this member to provide the great results they achieved and if they do publish them, I want verification by a third party.
Regards,
Gasman
|
Jun 17 '08
4:33 pm PDT
|
|
Re: Someone doesn't read the facts! (Reply to this comment)
by ladyleopard
Techtraders, I would like to see more independent studies done by unbiased companies. You have only 1 company that has tested your product, and paid by your company to do so. You offered to allow people to speak directly to some of your customers, but this will only serve to pump up the company rather than pumping up the reality of the usefulness of the product, as I'm sure you will not give any contact info out from consumers who are not happy with your product, putting you at unfair advantage.
I do not in any way mean to downgrade the product, I've seen only 1 study that was listed in a US government sponsored website, and only 1 study, on one product, in laboratory conditions, isn't a very good indicator of the efficiency of the product you are boasting.
I would love to see your marketing team get together with televised housing experts and encourage them to use your product in different areas of the US, if not the world. Shows Such as this old house, and other housing teams who would be completely unbiased and be able to do a follow-up study within a year, 5 years and 10 years. Of course, it will take 10 years to complete the study, but if your product is as good as you say, it is worth the wait, as the testers will be real people in real living conditions, and if it does work that means more money for you as you will be selling it like hotcakes at a church fundraiser. ;)
It may also be beneficial to all of us if perhaps your company is willing to give some of the product to organizations that help low income families, particularly those who do not have their energy bills vendored, or paid for by the state and/or federal government. Those are the people who will give real testimony to the affect of the product and will notice a difference in their energy bill right off.
I'm very much interested in this, in particular the efficiency of the indoor paint additive. If there is only a 5% improvement in temperature within the dwelling, and it will maintain a 5% improvement over a period of at least 10 years, it is worth the cost. 5% = 5 cents on a dollar, and energy bills for a house run into the hundreds. Even a $100 energy bill minus 5% is 5 bucks in my pocket, and more is better. ;)
|
Jun 16 '08
1:47 pm PDT
|
|
Re: Re: Does it reflect heat (Reply to this comment)
by ladyleopard
I contacted a US government sponsored sight, called energyideas.org because I couldn't find anything specific in regards to insulating paint. I was directed to a pdf file that I am going to post here.
According to the study that was conducted in regards to the insulating ceramic paint additive, there was a difference of only .03% (insulated roof) to 3% (insulated roof) on the indoor paint additive when applied to ceilings. Not very significant, though it would save a few bucks a month, but not near what the claims of any of these type product sights have posted.
This pdf shows a few different types of additives for insulating the exterior of buildings, and only 1 for the ceramic paint additive Insuladd.
http://www.energyideas.org/documents/Factsheets/PTR/Insuladd.pdf
|
Jun 16 '08
1:04 pm PDT
|
|
|
|
© 1999-2009 Shopping.com, Inc.